By the way for reference Adrian is a really nice brilliant guy who I spoke to for a short time at CassandraSF. I totally respect his opinion but, he probably hates my guts cause I am nitpicking anything he says about cloud stuff.

While I was re-reading amazon's claims that DynamoDB was cheaper then the equivalent NoSQL solution. Adrian was pointing out that they were talking about MongoDB not Cassandra. I am really not buying this at all. If you were to compare DynamoDB it only makes sense to compare it to something Dynamo like Cassandra or Riak. But whatever...

As I was reading I decided to go investigate some of the claims in the white paper. I ran across the reference to:

"File Storage Cost Less in the cloud" This is pretty relevant to some recent blogs I did which claimed Amazon was a total rip off storage wise. Since forester information is well respected I thought I would at least check it out.

I hit a ROFL moment when I realized that this was paid content. This is some irony a paper trying to prove to me that Cloud computing is cheaper is referencing a paper that cloud storage is cheaper, but I have to pay money to get proof.

Well this just sums it up for me, the people that use phrases like "cost of sysadmins" want me to pay money to get their opinion.

Call it the "Walmart effect" of the cloud. Gone are your system admins, routing professionals, and DBAs. They are replaced by cloud computers and cloud databases. All that talent that you could have on your team is deemed marginal and useless with phrases like "cost of sys admin" instead you rely on white papers written by people with self serving motives as your source of truth. Inferior products like Amazon high latency network can push out smaller better faster network providers. Why even write innovative code? You can not compete with Amazon DynamoDB, or whatever Amazon white paper says is the solution to your problem?